Instead of a neutral risk assessment of the LHC: New records and plans for costly upgrades at CERN (March 31 2012)

(March 31 2012) High energy experiments like the LHC at the nuclear research centre CERN are extreme energy consumers (needing the power of a nuclear plant). Their construction is extremely costly (presently 7 Billion Euros). Practical benefits are not in sight. The experiments eventually pose existential risks and these risks have not been properly investigated.

CERN has announced new records in collision energies at the LHC. Instead of conducting a neutral risk assessment, CERN plans costly upgrades of its Big Bang machine. Facing a LHC upgrade in 2013 for up to CHF 1 Billion and the perspective of a Mega-LHC in 2022: How long will it take until risk researchers are finally integrated in a neutral safety assessment?

There are countless evidences for the necessity of a neutral safety assessment of the LHC. It is not acceptable that the clueless member states point at the operator CERN itself, while this regards its self-set security measures as sufficient, in spite of critique from risk researchers, continuous debates and the publication of further papers pointing at concrete dangers eventually arising from the experiments. Presently science must admit that the risk is disputed and basically unknown. Especially facing the planned upgrades of the LHC, CERN will be confronted with increasing critique from scientific and civil side that the most powerful particle collider has yet not been challenged in a neutral and multidisciplinary safety assessment. CERN has yet not answered to pragmatic proposals for such a process that also should involve critics and CERN. That’s why also further juristic steps from different sides seem possible.

CERN and the member states should finally agree to an external and multidisciplinary risk assessment – as proposed by risk researchers - including CERN physicists and critics, moderated by experts in risk analysis.

Comments

It is not the first time that CERN announces record energies and news around April 1 – apparently hoping that some critique and concerns about the risks could be misinterpreted as an April joke. Additionally CERN regularly starts up the LHC at Easter celebrations when people (also journalists) prefer to have peaceful days with their friends and families.

There are countless evidences for the necessity of a neutral safety assessment of the LHC. It is not acceptable that the clueless member states point at the operator CERN itself, while this regards its self-set security measures as sufficient, in spite of critique from risk researchers, continuous debates and the publication of further papers pointing at concrete dangers eventually arising from the experiments. Presently science must admit that the risk is disputed and basically unknown. Especially facing the planned upgrades of the LHC, CERN will be confronted with increasing critique from scientific and civil side that the most powerful particle collider has yet not been challenged in a neutral and multidisciplinary safety assessment. CERN has yet not answered to pragmatic proposals for such a process that also should involve critics and CERN. That’s why also further juristic steps from different sides seem possible.

It always makes sense to critically take part in current internet discussions on the latest articles and reports related to the topic. It is a shame that most media reports come along without any critical remark, though the high costs and energy consume are increasingly mentioned.